Loading...
7. Applebee's Internation: Site Plan and Variances.CHANHASSU 7 BH, Highway Business District STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Site plan approval for a 5,500 square foot restaurant; a variance of five percent from the 65 percent site coverage to permit 70 percent site coverage; and a variance request to permit signage on two sides of the building, Applebee's Restaurant LOCATION: Lot 4, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition; 550 West 79th Street Z ' U J CL CL �a APPLICANT: Applebee's International Gary Fisher 4551 West 107th Street, #100 Overland, KS 66027 (913) 967 -4005 O ' -LiJ 1.24 N - CBD, Frontier Center S - BH, vacant and Highway 5 E - BH, West 79th Street Center W - BH, Americana Bank WATER AND SEWER: Available to site f PC DATE: 2/7/96 CC DATE: 2/26/96 CASE #: 95 -20 SP By: Generous:v Action by City Endorsed ��'� — Rejected__ _.r.-.-----,---•— Date submit',ed to Commissiort L to Councit PHYSICAL-CHARACTER: _The. site. is, relatively_ flat with.no. significant environmental features. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial PRESENT ZONING: ' ACREAGE: Ai3 ACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: O ' -LiJ 1.24 N - CBD, Frontier Center S - BH, vacant and Highway 5 E - BH, West 79th Street Center W - BH, Americana Bank WATER AND SEWER: Available to site f PC DATE: 2/7/96 CC DATE: 2/26/96 CASE #: 95 -20 SP By: Generous:v Action by City Endorsed ��'� — Rejected__ _.r.-.-----,---•— Date submit',ed to Commissiort L to Councit PHYSICAL-CHARACTER: _The. site. is, relatively_ flat with.no. significant environmental features. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial ' Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 2 I PROPOSAL /SUMMARY The applicant is proposing a 5,500 square foot restaurant for Applebee's on Lot 4, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition. The development of the site complies with the HC -1 standard. The building is oriented to West 79th Street. This orientation maintains the visual concept which ' the city would like for the entire site. The development of the entire Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition will locate structures to the periphery of the site with the majority of parking located in the center. Access to the site will be via a private street that will serve all four lots within the development. Cross access easements and joint parking agreements will be incorporated into the development. Pedestrian access will be encouraged via a sidewalk system from West 79th Street and internal sidewalks within the subdivision as well as from the Americana Bank site to the ' west. L The materials and details of the buildings are consistent with the Hwy. 5 standards. The project incorporates brick exterior with the primary color of "Monticello Blend" (red) with accents of "Wirecut Light Gray" (tan -gray) and a well designed landscaping plan. Building materials are of a high quality. The applicant has provided the pitched roof element through the extension of a sloped roof over the protruding seating areas as well as through the use of window canopies. Canopy coloring consists of green, sand, and rust. Staff is recommending that an additional pitched roof element be incorporated over the cooler area on the east side of the building. The applicant is proposing the provision of 89 parking spaces. In order to meet the landscaping requirements for the site, at a 70 percent coverage, the applicant will lose one of the parking spaces in the southeast corner of the site for a total of 88 parking spaces on site. City code requires a minimum of 110 parking spaces for this use (1 space per 50 square feet). The additional parking will be provided via cross access and cross parking arrangements within this development and between this development and the Americana Bank building to the west. City code section 20 -1117 permits this type of parking arrangement if peak hours of operation for the various uses are complementary and the joint parking facilities are protected by a recorded instrument acceptable to the city. The applicant is proposing site coverage of 70 percent after the incorporation of staff's recommendation to add landscape area. City code permits a maximum site coverage of 65 percent in the BH district. Originally, the applicant was proposing site coverage of 72.39 percent. Staff has worked with the applicant to revise the plans to reduce this deficiency. Staff = believes° that- tlre-revised- plans•art&the approval -ofthe -variance- forsite- coverage °of 70- percent -is acceptable. The comprehensive plan assumes site coverage of 70 percent for commercial development and the ponding area for this drainage district assumed 70 percent site coverage. In approving the subdivision of Crossroads 3rd Addition, the city required that the development as a whole comply with the 65 percent site coverage requirement which would require a minimum 1 Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 3 landscape area for the entire plat of 57,666 square feet. However, staff's assumption that this could be met was based on an erroneous calculation for the concept plan on the property. The cumulative deficiency in landscaping area, after the development of Lots 1 and 4 would be approximately 3,000 square feet, which staff believes is an unacceptable burden for Lots 2 and 3. The applicant is requesting a sign variance to permit wall signage on two building elevations. Neither the size, shape, nor topography of the lot prevent the placement of a sign which meets ordinance requirements. Staff finds that the applicant has a reasonable and equitable opportunity to advertise the business name and service with one wall sign. Staff is recommending denial of the sign variance request. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan and site coverage variance for this project subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. BACKGROUND On November 13, 1995, City Council granted preliminary and final plat approval to replat Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition into 4 lots and site plan review approval for a 7,742 square foot Tires Plus facility on Lot 1, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition. On March 9, 1992, the Chanhassen City Council approved Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition which replatted Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza Addition, into two lots. Council also granted site plan approval for an 11,468 square foot bank and office building for Americana Community Bank. On October 23, 1989, the Chanhassen City Council approved a site plan for a 14,000 square foot bank and office building. However, the development was never undertaken and the applicant withdrew the site plan. On February 12, 1989, the Chanhassen City Council approved preliminary and final plat for Crossroads Plaza Addition. The plat consisted of two lots and four outlots. Two of the outlots were utilized for Highway 5 right -of -way. The other two outlots were used for drainage and stormwater retention ponds. GENERAL SITE PLAN /ARCHITECTURE °Therproposed- development- is conceptual- site °development planrestablished -as part of the Crossroads Plaza Third Addition subdivision. The intent of the concept plan was to promote pedestrian access, to locate site parking in an interior, shared arrangement, and to push the building to the front of the site. r. i Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 4 The proposed development is within the Highway 5 corridor and must comply with the design standards established therein. The standards of the overlay district include: 1 Parking and building orientation: The site meets this standard. The parking setback in the HC -1 district are those established by the underlying zoning. The site parking meets this requirement. The building is oriented to West 79th Street. This orientation maintains the visual concept which the city would like for the entire site. The development of the entire Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition will locate structures to the periphery of the site with the majority of parking located in the center. 2 3 The architectural design standards. • The materials and details of the buildings are consistent with the Hwy. 5 standards. The project incorporates brick exterior with a well designed landscaping plan. Building materials are of a high quality. The applicant has provided the pitched roof element through the extension of a sloped roof over the protruding seating areas as well as through the use of window canopies. • The overall design and architectural theme for the development consists of brick exterior walls, recessed areas, and varied building facades. • Building height is limited to three stories or 40 feet. The proposed structure is one story of approximately 18 feet. The district regulations limit building height to 2 stories. • The proposed development incorporates the use of high quality materials in both building and landscaping elements. • The site design is such as to avoid the accumulation of trash, leaves and dirt. • The building components are proportional and relate well to one another. -e ?Building% colors- are- harmeniousAand- create-a- pleasant -aesthetic °e�xperiene-,. Landscape Design and Site Furnishings Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 5 The applicant's landscaping plan is well designed and incorporates the use of native tree species as well as extensive buffering materials. The plan reforests a site devoid of vegetation. PARKING The applicant is proposing the provision of 89 parking spaces. In order to meet the landscaping requirements for the site, at a 70 percent coverage, the applicant will lose one of the parking spaces in the southeast corner of the site for a total of 88 parking spaces on site. City code requires a minimum of 110 parking spaces for this use (1 space per 50 square feet). The additional parking will be provided via cross access and cross parking arrangements within this development and between this development and the Americana Bank building to the west. City code section 20 -1117 permits this type of parking arrangement if peak hours of operation for the various uses are complementary and the joint parking facilities are protected by a recorded instrument acceptable to the city. LANDSCAPING The landscaping plan for Applebee's Restaurant has been submitted and shows a satisfactory mix of species to be planted including four different overstory species and two ornamental varieties. The minimum required number of landscaping trees for its parking lot area is 10. The applicant has proposed 16 trees for the parking lot area and 30 trees total in the overall landscaping plans. The applicant has proposed pin oaks for the parking lot islands and peninsulas. These trees are tolerant of dry soils, but not of salt and can become chloratic (turn yellowish and lose color) if the soil pH is high. Northern red oaks on the other hand, are tolerant of salt, less prone to chlorosis, and fairly tolerant of a wide variety of soil and site conditions. Due to these facts, red oaks may be a more appropriate choice for the parking lot. The pin oaks are to be planted in all the parking lot islands, however, since two of the islands are only 8 1/2 feet wide they will require aeration tubes to be installed. Parking lot islands less than 10 feet wide are required to provide aeration for tree roots. To meet minimum landscape area requirements, additional green area will be created from proposed hard surface areas. One of those locations will be directly along the northern side of the building. Sod will be extended over the two - square sidewalk currently proposed. In this area, additional ornamental trees should be provided to screen diner's view of the parking lot. - Arother- area °to -- irrcreaseYgreenrarea is`throughihe�elimination�of one°o�the�parking-stafls�inrthe southwest corner of the site. Finally, the four paving squares under the benches can be removed. These revisions increase the pervious surface in excess of 16,200 square feet which would provide 30 percent pervious surface. L 1 F I L� Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 6 On the south side of the building, the eastern half is a blank wall without windows and adorned only with lights. Planted along the wall are junipers and shrub roses. The Buffalo junipers proposed grow to a height of only 12 -15 inches and the roses to 3 feet. Since this is the side exposed to 79th Street and Highway 5, there should be additional trees planted to break up the brick wall. Whether the trees are placed directly along the wall in addition to the shrubs or grouped farther out in the sodded area, they will provide the additional landscaping needed to interrupt the exposed brick wall and enhance the project from the southern perspective. The landscaping plan does not propose the planting of any trees on the west side of the parking ' lots area. Staff believes that the planting of trees in this area will help soften the parking lot and aid in shading of the hard surface. Staff is recommending that three overstory trees be provided in this area. ' LIGHTING /SIGNAGE 1 'J The applicant is proposing the use of 20 bronze poles with shielded, shoe -box lighting fixtures for parking lot and entry drive lighting. Total height of the lighting shall be approximately 22 feet. Except along the access drives, the city requires that light levels as measured at the property line shall not exceed one -half foot candle. The applicant is proposing an eight foot high monument sign in the southeast corner of the site. This sign appears to meet ordinance requirements. The applicant is proposing wall signs on two building elevations. City Code permits wall signage on street frontage only, in this case, the south elevation. The applicant has requested as part of their application a variance for the second wall sign. The applicant has provided signage on the building elevation for the site plan. This signage appears to comply with the sign ordinance; however, insufficient detail is submitted to completely evaluate the signage. In addition, the sign may not project above the roof line (parapet) of the building. Approval of the site plan does not grant final approval for the signage as submitted in the site plan package. The applicant shall apply for a separate sign permit for all signage on the site. Signage shall comply with City Code requirements. UTILITIES In conjunction with the site improvements for Tires Plus /Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition, municipal sanitary sewer and water and storm sewer improvements will be extended from West 79th Street to service this site as well as the other three lots in Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition. `Sincnhese - itrtprove-ments - will °lie put itr�by'the T�ires"Plus applicant; no additional public improvements will be necessary to develop the Applebee's site. In accordance with the development contract for Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition, the applicant will be responsible for reimbursing the Tires Plus applicant for their fair share of the site development costs. The n IJ Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 7 applicant should inspect the City's storm sewer system prior to constructing on the site to avoid conflicts in the future as to responsibilities for cleaning the existing storm sewer lines. GRADING Only minor site grading is involved to grade the parking lot. The site grading will involve adjusting existing storm sewer manholes along West 79th Street. The applicant should be aware that they and /or their contractor will be responsible for any adjustments to the manholes and cleaning of the City's storm sewer lines as a result of construction. PARKING LOT CIRCULATION The site is being developed in general conformance with the overall master site plan previously submitted and approved with the Tires Plus /Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition development. Applebee's will be constructing the parking lot and drive aisles over their portion of the lot. They will also be modifying the entrance or cross - through connection to Americana Bank's parking lot. The radiuses of the islands adjacent to the main drive aisles need to be increased from 10 feet to 20 feet to accommodate turning movements of fire trucks and delivery vehicles. SITE PLAN FINDINGS In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's compliance with the following: (1) Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; (2) Consistency with this division; (3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing areas; (4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; (5) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: i F F1 LJ Fil 1 1 L_ 1 Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 8 a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; C. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (6) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Finding: The proposed development does comply with the Zoning Ordinance and the Highway 5 overlay standards. The applicant is proposing site coverage of 70 percent after the incorporation of staffs recommendation to add landscape area. City code permits a maximum site coverage of 65 percent. Originally, the applicant was proposing site coverage of 72.39 percent. Staff has worked with the applicant to revise the plans to reduce this deficiency. Staff believes that the revised plans and the approval of the variance for site coverage of 70 percent is acceptable. The comprehensive plan assumes site coverage of 70 percent for commercial development and the ponding area for this drainage district assumed 70 percent site coverage. In approving the subdivision of Crossroads 3rd Addition, the city required that the development as a whole comply with the 65 percent site coverage requirement which would require a minimum landscape area for the entire plat of 57,666 square feet. However, staffs assumption that this could be met was based on an erroneous calculation for the concept plan on the property. The cumulative deficiency in landscaping area, after the development of Lots 1 and 4 would be approximately 3,000 square feet, which staff believes is an unacceptable burden for Lots 2-and-3. LJ Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 9 VARIANCE FINDING SIGN The city council, upon the recommendation of the planning commission, may grant a variance from the requirements of this article where it is shown that by reason of topography or other conditions, strict compliance with the requirements of this article would cause a hardship; provided that a variance may be granted only if the variance does not adversely affect the spirit or intent of this article (Section 20- 1253). Finding Neither the size, shape, nor topography of the lot prevent the placement of a sign which meets ordinance requirements. Staff finds that the applicant has a reasonable and equitable opportunity to advertise the business name and service with one wall sign. SITE COVERAGE The City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre- existing standards in this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre- existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. Finding: The comprehensive plan assumes site coverage of 70 percent for commercial development and the ponding area for this drainage district assumed 70 percent site coverage. In approving the subdivision of Crossroads 3rd Addition, the city required that the development as a whole comply with the 65 percent site coverage requirement which would require a minimum landscape area for the entire plat of 57,666 square feet. However, staff's assumption that this could be met was based on an erroneous calculation for the concept plan on the property. The cumulative deficiency in landscaping area, after the development of Lots 1 and 4 would be approximately 3,000 square feet, which staff believes is an unacceptable burden for Lots 2 and 3. °b. The - conditions -upon whichAa -petition -for °a variance -is- based- are- not-applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. Finding: The conditions upon which this petition for a variance are applicable generally to other properties within the same zoning classification. However, in this instance, the LJ Li Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 10 city is attempting to create a unified development on four separate lots with a common driveway area, which increases impervious coverage on this lot, and shared parking and open space. C. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Finding: The purpose of the site coverage variance will permit the owner to build their prototype structure, with modifications requested by the city, on a city created lot that incorporates cross access and cross parking agreements. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self - created hardship. Finding: The hardship is related to the size, physical surroundings, and shape of the site and the desire, on the part of the city, to create a unified development for the four lots in this subdivision. e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Finding: The granting of the variance to the site coverage will not be detrimental or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. The sizing of the stormwater ponding for this area was based on commercial development at 70 percent impervious coverage, consistent with the comprehensive plan. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increases the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Finding: The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 7, 1996 to review the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the site plan, deleting the variance to the site coverage, and adding condition #16 requiring the establishment of standards for the height and color of the parking lot light poles and condition Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 11 #17 requiring additional landscaping and architectural features be added to the east side of the building. The Planning Commission was concerned that the granting of a variance for site coverage on the lot would in essence create a new standard for the BH district. Also as required by the subdivision, the entire plat of Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition was to meet the 65 percent impervious surface so that any deficiency would be made up with the development of Lots 2 and 3. Staff has calculated the impervious surface coverage for the developments to the east and west of Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition. The West 79th Street Center, directly to the east, has an impervious surface coverage of 81 percent. The Americana Bank to the west has an impervious surface coverage of 64.3 percent. In addition, staff has calculated the impervious surface coverage for Holiday Gas Station (60 %), Prairie House Restaurant (60 %), Chanhassen Inn (60 %), and Brown's Amoco (64 %). As can be seen by the above review, the majority of developments, for which staff could find the relevant data, do comply with the ordinance requirement for site coverage. While this individual lot does not meet the site coverage requirement, the subdivision as a whole could still comply. The Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) acquired the property immediately to the south of Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition in order to maintain this area as a natural entry feature to the downtown and to preclude the development of the site with commercial uses and impervious surface. The site is a total of 38,652 square feet in area consisting of 14,694 square feet of upland and 23,958 square feet of wetland. In addition, the city owns the land to the west of this parcel which is currently used for stormwater ponding. This may or may not suffice to meet the intent of the city's green area policies. (N.B. Applebee's is in the process of submitting an application for a liquor license to the City of Chanhassen. City Council will be reviewing this application within the next two months separately from the site plan review.) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motions: " °City Council� the -sigmvariance request -to�permit ° wall- signage- on�two °building elevations based on the findings contained in the staff report." "The City Council approves site plan #95 -20 for a 5,500 square foot restaurant building on Lot 4, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition, based on the site plan dated 12/4/95 and revised L I f 1 Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 12 12/13/95, and a five percent variance to the lot area coverage to permit site coverage of 70 percent subject to the following conditions: 1. Install aeration tubes in the two 8 1/2 foot center islands. 2. Replace the pin oaks with red oaks on the proposed landscaping plan. 3. Provide ornamental plantings in the sodded area in front of the north side of the building. 4. Incorporate trees in the landscaping on the south side of the building. 5. Install three trees adjacent to the western property line west of the parking lot. These trees shall be selected from the approved tree list and must be overstory trees suitable for parking lots. 6. Install "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and paint the curbing yellow. Contact the Fire Marshal for the exact location. I 13. Staff recommends that the radiuses on the parking lot islands adjacent to the main drive aisles - be- inereased - from - 1 - 0-feet° --to 20--feet. ' 14. The applicant and/or contractor shall be responsible for adjusting any existing storm sewer manholes and cleaning the City's storm sewer system as needed in conjunction with this site ' development. 7. Full park and trail fees shall be paid per city ordinance. 8. The applicant shall enter into a site development agreement for the property and provide the necessary security to meet the conditions of approval. ' 9. The applicant shall incorporate a pitched roof element over the cooler units on the east side of the building. ' 10. Eliminate one of the parking spaces in the southwest corner of the site, eliminate the paving squares under the two Applebee's benches adjacent to the entrance to the building, and eliminate the sidewalk area north of the building to expand the landscaping area. 11. The applicant shall apply for a separate sign permit for all signage on the site. Signage shall comply with City Code requirements. 12. The joint parking facilities shall be protected by a recorded instrument acceptable to the city. I 13. Staff recommends that the radiuses on the parking lot islands adjacent to the main drive aisles - be- inereased - from - 1 - 0-feet° --to 20--feet. ' 14. The applicant and/or contractor shall be responsible for adjusting any existing storm sewer manholes and cleaning the City's storm sewer system as needed in conjunction with this site ' development. Applebee's Restaurant January 17, 1996 Page 13 15 . Rock construction entrances should be included with the site plan drawings. All catch basins shall be protected with silt fence and /or hay bales until the parking lot is paved. 16. A subdivision standard be established for the height and color of the pole lighting. 17 . Additional landscaping and architectural features be added to enhance the east side of the building." ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Application 2. Reduced Preliminary Site Plan 3. Preferred Concept Plan, West 79th Street Parcel 4. Memo from Steve Kirchman to Bob Generous dated 12/21/95 5. Memo from Mark Littfin to Robert Generous dated 12/11/95 6. Notice of Public Hearing and Mailing List 7. Planning Commission Minutes of 2/7/96 ' CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937.1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: APPLEBEE' S INTERNATIONAL OWNER: SAME GARY FISCIIER ' ADDRESS: 4551 WEST 107TH STREET, #100 ADDRESS: I'l OVERLAND PARK, KANSAS 66207 TELEPHONE (Day time) ( 9 13 ) 967 -4005 ' FAX (913) 341 -1695 C! A Ilst of all roe p p rty owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must included with the application. $100.00 Deposit. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 8 1 /2 " X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. " Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract TELEPHONE: 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW /Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. XX Variance $75.00 Sign on 2 Elev 3. interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non - conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. Sign Plan Review XX Notification Signs $50.00 9 XX Site Plan Review $300.00 X Escrow for Filing Fees /Attorney Cost" ($50 CUP /SPRNACNAR/WAP /Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) 10. Subdivision TOTAL FEE $ PROJECT NAME APPLEBEE'S RESTAURANT LOCATION CROSSROADS PLAZA THIRD ADDITION LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 4, BLK 1 CROSSROADS P THIRD ADDITION I PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION REASON FOR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization, to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Date Receipt No. L I The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be malled to the applicant's address. I ' J Application Received on Fee Paid 1 I _ 1 - �, 1 rl r \ry IF1= , 1 _ � I 1 c I V _ 230.00 I I I � ' �I �• � II11 Tlk i I 1 I I I „�,,, � , , „��,. ,•,.� IIIIIII I I I — 1 I C 1 I1 \ I 1 '1 I roa ­ 7: 7 � >, im NL� RED AURANI �� I 1 I I 1 t r /! i / v oo y�� 4 m m m _. m m m 1`� I O� k�l . m = m SITE SYMBOLS Nel� GIs a BQ t ` r- -=- iu.� aw sw,:•oo N ate.., � s1.o •�__ ,0. c: .► @r r I Ra • �• am 0 A BITE PLAN REv iEUJ PAR KIN G SUlO(ARY AREASUMMARY .... ^ .�•. ..„o.. -., - ZONING SUMMARY u �I PROJECT : APPLEBEE'S RESTAURANT Ch—b—..., Minn•. to cawgeD.0 20 4 0 1'IflLMNlJlT , 1 DITC lLFll _ �01271I_iCAI. SITE STATISTICS x I z w 6V c*'� r> ca ,-t c� a; w �O c. HARD SURFACE LANDSCAPED AREA PARKING LOT 77,319 TOTAL SITE 166,400 S.F. BUILDINGS 24,038 S.F. HARII SURFACE 106,761 S.F SIDEWALKS 5404 S.F. LANDSCAPED 60,139 S.F. TOTAL 106,76) S.F. RATIO OF LANDSCAPED TO TOTAL SFfE = 36.03% l 7 0 16 JO 60 90 120 FEET `a' WEST 79TH STREET PARCEL Bu?i {� C?CTl'4[�h.00 FrUiIQg4 CsCJG'16[�t�E3 Chanhassen, MN F' PREFEliREDCONCEPT S,t �4�71[ta.2 ers+rxi � 4i'L9CC�s.Y�� Q�� t t CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Planner II FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official 1 � DATE: December 21, 1995 SUBJECT: 95 -20 SPR (Applebee's International) I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, DEC 04 1995 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project. I have no comments or recommendations concerning this application at this time. I would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements. g:\safety\sak\nemos\plan\applebe 1.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN To: 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 Robert Generous, AICP Planner II From: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal Date: December 11, 1995 Subject: Site Plan Review Applebee's, Lot 4, Block 1 Planning Case: 95 -20 Site Plan I have reviewed the site plan for the above project.. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division, I have the following fire code on City Ordinances /policy requirements. The site plan review is based on the available information submitted at this time. As additional plans or changes are submitted the appropriate code or policy item will be addressed. 1. Install "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and paint the curbing yellow. Contact the Fire Marshal for the exact location. g -.Nsafety�nNapplebee NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Wednesday, JANUARY 17, 1996 at 7:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers 690 Coulter Drive 1 Project: Applebee's Restaurant 1 Developer: Applebee's International Location: West 79th Street, just east of Market Boulevard Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant, Applebee's International, is requesting site plan approval of a 5,500 square foot Applebee's restaurant; a sign variance request for two wall signs; and a variance to site coverage of 5% to permit 70% site coverage located on property zoned BH, Highway Business District, Lot 4, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza Third Addition. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: I. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 1 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. 1 Questions or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City ' Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937 -1900, ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff 1 will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on January 11, 1996. 1 i Robert Dittrich John H. Dorek et al Bloomberg Companies 1827 Crestview Drive 581 West 78th Street P. O. Box 730 New Ulm, MN 56073 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Waterfront Associates 440 Union Place Excelsior, MN 55331 Thaddeus Korzenowski 20645 Radison Road Excelsior, MN 55331 -9181 Ralph Molnau Ronald Dubbe 356 3� Street West ,Vaconia, ^'iN 55387 Chanhassen Inn 531 79th Street W. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Estate of Martin Ward c/o Jerome Raidt Pers Rep 930 Baker Bldg. 730 2nd Ave. S. Minneapolis, MN 55402 -2d75 B. C. Burdick 684 Excelsior Blvd. Excelsior, MN 55331 Donald McCarville 3349 Warner Lane Mound, MN 55364 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 final plat approval. The plans shall be designed in accordance with the latest edition of the city's standard specifications and detail plates. Final plat approval is contingent upon approval of the construction plans by the Chanhassen City Council. 1 24. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat street right -of -way along the easterly 30 feet of the northerly 160 feet of Lot 5, Block 1. ' 25. Fire hydrants shall be installed with 300 feet maximum spacing. A ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants. 26. Delete Outlot A and combine with the adjacent lots and dedicate a 30 foot private street easement over Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 for ingress and egress. ' 27. The applicant's engineer shall work with city staff in revising the construction plans to minimize grading on the site. 28. The cul -de -sac be made to look permanent and set back the appropriate amount, i.e.30_ feet, from the Donovan property. ' All voted in favor and the motion canied unanimously. Mancino: When will this go before City Council? Generous: February 26th. ' Mancino: Thank you. Thanks for coming. ' (Craig Peterson left the meeting during the following item and did not vote on the remaining items.) ' APPLEBEE'S INTERNATIONAL REQUEST A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 5,500 SQUARE FOOT APPLEBEE'S RESTAURANT; A SIGN VARIANCE REQUEST FOR TWO WALL SIGNS; AND A VARIANCE TO SITE COVERAGE OF 5% TO PERMIT ' 70% SITE COVERAGE LOCATED ON PROPERTY ZONED BH HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT, LOT 4, BLOCK 1, CROSSROADS PLAZA THIRD ADDITION Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions for staff? WE Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Conrad: Yeah. The 5% variance. I think, I wouldn't have a problem with it if we were talking about 1 or 2 but I really, I don't know how to rationalize the 5 Bob. The only way I could rationalize the 5, if we change the whole district back to 70 %. The city owns this. It's a city project and we're going to change the standard to 70% from 65. I just philosophically have a real problem with that and it seems that we're doing it because of our convenience because we own it. That's my only comment. Well no. I guess I need Bob to respond. I asked the question and didn't wait for you to respond but how do we rationalize that? Mancino: Well we rationalized it by saying the comprehensive plan assumes site coverage of 70% for commercial development. Conrad: Okay. Mancino: I read the comprehensive plan and did not read anywhere in the comprehensive plan that it assumes a site coverage of 70% for commercial. I haven't found it in the comprehensive plan. I spent some time looking at it and said where does it assume this? I haven't found it. And so... Conrad: But I think commercial, our standard is 70 and 30, right? Mancino: Well, for CBD there's no max. I mean the CBD is no max at all, and that's where we said we would have higher density. We would have a lot of parking and not a lot of green space. In the CBD and we were planning on that. And in the business, the general business district it's 70 %. In the BH it's 65 %. And in the IOP it's 70% but when you get out to business fringe it's 40 %. Otherwise it's 65% so we have a real mix. We don't have assumed at 70 from what I found in the city code. Conrad: Bob, do you think the intent of a 65 %, 35 split in the highway business district is for buffering? Is that really the. Generous: I think so and to give the view of the green, the open area. Mancino: As you enter the downtown. Generous: Right. Mancino: Yeah. Generous: Now the city could have resolved this if they would have included the land across the street that we're keeping for open space as the green area on the site because we're 30 L 0 r I Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 shifting it all around and the whole thing's going to meet the 65 %. But we didn't do that as ' apart of our subdivision because we are keeping all the land. Part of the acquisition of this property was a deal to purchase the property to the south. On the south side of West 79th and we were going to use that for wetland mitigation and storm water ponding over there and keep, make that an actual amenity for the downtown and entry treatment and natural state. So yeah, we're picking it up on a different property. n Mancino: But what about the Americana Bank and some of these others? I mean I think we have to play fair to all businesses in this district and did we require them to come in at 65 %? Generous: I didn't check Americana. Cheers is over. The restaurant is over. Over 70 %. Mancino: Which restaurant? Generous: The one that's closed. That Prairie. Mancino: The one that's closed, okay. Generous: You know some of those older developments. Mancino: I mean that Cheers area, is that 65 %? Generous: No. I looked at it. It was over 70 %, but that was an older development. They have a lot of parking lot. Very minimal green area. They went all the way around their building and that's, you know it was a convenience at the time and the idea was to provide all the surface so people could circulate around there. I don't have the exact number. If you'd like, I could calculate all those. Mancino: Well I just think that's a big principle. I mean once we set it and we ask certain businesses to come in, it just seems unfair to business owners to have it not be consistent so. Generous: Right. We couldn't deny the variance on this and just push it off to Lots 2 and 3, which is established as part of it. We did a green area on the site. Because we're really treating this all as one unit. Conrad: Well, I'm just real uncomfortable on this one Madam Chair. It's like we own it so we're going to change the law, the rule, and we forced some others I know to maintain it and I - think -Bob, I-- don' t - really have a- probl'em-m*thifreepfat. - I tak sub'divisi`on `aud=it ali looks good. You know it's just like, it's fine. It's just fine but a 5% change is big and I guess I could, next one in, I don't know how I'd talk to them. I'd just say, what do you want. 31 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: Bob, will you also, oh I'm sorry. Conrad: I'm done. Mancino: Take a minute for me and just let us understand the extra 22 parking spaces that we're going to pick up from Americana Bank. That development. Generous: Well it's Americana, part of the arrangement that Todd or the HRA has worked out with, for these four lots and the Americana Bank so that we could have a more intensive development in this area. The bank closes at 6:00. Their parking lot's empty soon after 5:30. One of the peak times for restaurants in that evening period so they can, they're going to pick up that extra space. Mancino: Are we going to have a problem during the day because I actually went over to Americana Bank and I didn't see 22 extra parking spaces to pick up during the day so I was just wondering if everyone feels real comfortable about that. Generous: We think it will work out. You can't really tell. It really depends on the next two lots to develop and we're trying to work out one user for both of those and if that's the case, then it's easy. We have lots of excess and you'll see, what we don't want to do is you know these parking standards are planned for you know the 95, the highest use hour and most of the time they're vacant. We really don't want to see that on this. Mancino: Sure. I understand the mix. I just want to make sure that everybody was real comfortable. Generous: We think overall it's going to work out and we'll get a lot of, noon hour is the concern. Mancino: Sure. Generous: But we're making it pedestrian friendly so it will get people out of their car to walk there. Mancino: Is the applicant here and would they wish to present please? Make their presentation. Gary Fischer: �Goodx evening. - My islGary - Fis - ch °er. I'm with Applebee's`Internationa from Overland Park, Kansas. I'll be happy to answer any questions with regard to our operations, the site plan. I have our architect and our civil engineer is here tonight also to 32 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 answer any questions with regard to the two variance requests that we have tonight. The variance for coverage. We've been working with, we had been working with city representatives on this site plan for some time now to try to get our adequate parking to support our operation. We feel that we've had to make some concessions along the way to get our landscaping and other ordinance requirements to a point where we feel that they accommodate the city's needs. We also are very concerned though about the parking that we need for our operation, to a point where we really would hate to lose any more parking on the parts where we have no landscaping... cross parking that we have with the bank. Potentially that we'll have with the bank and with Tires Plus. And for that reason we're requesting the variance to coverage to the percent of coverage and hoping that you would take that into consideration with future development on the adjacent lots as far as taking it out of there. With regards to the variance on the two building signs. We feel that we do have somewhat of a hardship here in that,considering the configuration of the land and the adjacent right -of- ways. If we were to just place the single building sign on the south side of our building facing the highway. As you would approach the building from the north. Say coming down Market Street. Making a left on 79th Street. Coming around the curve. You would not be able to see the sign on our building facing Highway 5 because of the angle that the street is in relationship to that building. You're actually driving away from the building. As you pass our building and then eventually coming to that curb cut so the signage would not really be visible coming from the majority of the city. Although on the other hand, if you would place the sign on the west side of the building facing Market Street, towards Market Street, you would be not identifying a very important elevation on our building which does face ... and for that reason we're asking for two signs. They're not, we feel they're done very tastefully. They're not excessive in size and we feel it's an appropriate request. So if there's any other questions with regards to the site plan... Mancino: Any questions from commissioners at this point? Conrad: Just one. Is there, will there be a stop sign between the bank and Tires Plus? The access through there. Is that planned Dave? Hempel: At this point there is not a traffic signage plan but we could certainly look into that throughout the development, similar to like Byerly's or Market Square. There should be. Some sort of traffic signage. Conrad: It's sort of a strange, it's not the perfect access from Tires Plus through Americana because you basically go through the drive thru. Hempel: It's an unusual one. 33 I Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Conrad: We have to give that some attention because basically the right hand turn there, it's a tough one as you're going out of Tires Plus or Applebee's. The right hand turn into Americana is a tough turn. And then a quick left to get out. If you went back to the north I guess. So again I'm not sure how that works. I guess the only thing we don't want them to do is to drive through the drive thru so I guess that's. Generous: Unless they're depositing. Conrad: Yeah. Well that's right. That's right but it's a strange deal and I think we should take a look at how that access really does function. That's my only comment. Mancino: Thank you. A question. This is the west side and the south side of the building, correct? This rendering shows the south side toward the parking lot? Gary Fischer: Actually what you're looking at here would be the west side. This would be the north side. The sign would not be on this north side. It would be on the opposite side of the building. So this rendering is not accurate as you see it. Mancino: North side, yes. Yes, okay. Gary Fischer: So this is, when you're saying this is north side. You're looking at the... northwest corner. The sign that we're proposing would not be here. It would be on the other side facing the highway which you've got here. Mancino: Which would be the south side. Gary Fischer: Which would be the south side. Mancino: Okay. I'm a little interested on the east side. What does the east side look like? That is where people entered the, the east side of the building is going to be the main entryway to this whole... complex and could you go over that site elevation. It looks a little bit like a, the back of a building. Gary Fischer: Well unfortunately all restaurants have to have, or most buildings have to have a front and a back. We do have the necessity to have a service area for the restaurant where we have pick up trash, dumpster, building coolers, and what we do is typically on the, what we call the back of the building, we have that enclosed in a masonry ... wall that matches the -building-itself. = And ~b`efore,µwe went great''lengths working with the city to try to come up with a layout ... There was just no better way to do it. But like I said, it is fully screened. Done with the same material as the building. 34 I 1 L Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: I'm sorry. What is fully screened? I see 1, 2, 3, 4 doors. Generous: You have to go to sheet A -11, which is the one right in front of that. Mancino: Okay. So this is the east elevation? Gary Fischer: This would be the east elevation. Generous: Those doors are enclosed behind this elevation. Mancino: Oh! Thank you. That's very helpful. Generous: In addition, if you look at the first 18 feet 4 inches, staff is recommending that they incorporate a sloped roof element over that. Gary Fischer: That's the coolers here. But there's the plan view. Here's the back... Mancino: Now will you have any sort of decorative lighting here or do anything or any plantings to soften this? Gary Fischer: We can put some landscaping in along there. I believe we have, well the ... so we will have some landscaping that will come in along that driveway. Mancino: Okay. Is that part of the condition... Generous: Yeah, they could put some shrubbery up in that area. Gary Fischer: We could put some low shrubbery. I think we have some already in the front. Mancino: I would say some higher shrubbery to soften. Generous: Lilacs. Gary Fischer: We can do that. Mancino: Thank you. Any other architectural questions at this time? °S I havc ° gtrestion.. °c er questioned °`the colorings and at the'time'I didn't understand the significance of that until I saw a building come up and that gives a new appreciation of what he was asking. The illustrations here show a matte finish. The colors 35 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 aren't luminescent at all. Are these renderings accurate of the colors? I'm particularly thinking about the awnings. Gary Fischer: Actually those would be more accurate than the renderings. Skubic: Thank you. Mancino: Any other questions? Mehl: I had one. What side of the building will the, is the piping for the gas meters and the electric meters and water meters and this sort of thing placed? It seems like there's, are they ...behind the wall or concealed in any way? Gary Fischer: I believe the water, we have a utility room in the building and that's going to be on the northeast corner of the building. So that any, if there are any of those meters, I don't know that we've picked out a ... location but it would be on the north side of the building because that's where the majority, our utility room is right here ... Yeah, it is on the north side. The northeast corner. Mancino: Bob, we are not deciding, we are not okaying signage at this point tonight? That will come back to us as a separate item. The monuments. Generous: The general. Mancino: The specifics of the monument sign. Generous: The specifics we're not approving and that wouldn't, they'd be generally like this Mancino: Okay. Generous: It shows it on that Sheet A -11. Mancino: But again we're not approving this tonight. This monument sign. Generous: In a sense. Aanenson: I guess that's what we're looking for. For direction from you to have the ,monument--s gn and - that's-what° they're - asking far ' for`th - e variance =on "the 'additional waii sign. To give us some guidance. I mean that needs a decision in there. 36 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: Oh I understand the variance. Okay. Generous: So the answer would be yes, you are but they'd have to come in for a separate permit. ' Mancino: Okay, thank you. ' Generous: Which would not come back. Mancino: Which would not come back. Okay. Thank you. I don't think there are any other ' questions that we have at this point. If we do later, we'll certainly ask. Can we have a motion to open this for a public hearing? ' Comnad moved, Meyer seconded to open the public hewing. The public healing was opened. Mancino: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission on the Applebee's restaurant, please come up. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing. Meyer moved, Mehl seconded to close the public herring. The public hewing was closed. I Mancino: Comments. Mike. Questions. Meyer: Nice looking plan. Really I don't have any specifics. No specific comments. Mancino: Okay, Ladd. Conrad: Nothing. I like it. I just don't know how to handle the 65 versus 70. I really don't. I can't bundle it into this site plan. I honestly don't know how to do that Madam Chairman so my concern would be beyond this site plan and back to the entire subdivision itself. But ' that's not a function of the site plan. In my mind. Mancino: But you would be denying the variance for 70 %. ' Conrad: My preference is not to do that. ' Mancino: But you haven't found a way not to. Conrad: But I don't know how to solve the problem, yeah. The way to solve the problem is to change the ordinance and to allow all fringe business to be 65 %. That's one way. The 37 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 other way is to give staff directive to try to find, try to squeak out some added the other part and that's chancy. And it's just that I really don't know how to handle the next person that came in that didn't meet our 65 %. I'd just say sure. You've got what you want you know so basically I'm, if I go with this site plan it's saying, my new standard in this district is 65 %. Mancino: 70 %. Conrad: 70 %, yeah. Sorry. Mancino: What about sign variances. Having an additional wall sign not on a frontage road Now that is, they already have the frontage on 79th, which is very visible from Highway 5. Wonderful site for Applebee's. I mean it's just great. Gary Fischer: I'll compliment our real estate person for that one. Mancino: And there is a monument sign on 79th so that when you are on Market and you turn east on 79th, you're going to see that monument sign. It's visible. It's right there. In fact it's out a little way ... on 79th from either end. Anyway. So your feelings on the... area for the wall signs. Conrad: I don't think we need one. Skubic: I also don't feel we need a sign variance for the reason that Madam Chair pointed out and I'm also perplexed by the coverage issue that Ladd pointed out. I don't have anything to add to that. I would favor adding to the recommendations that we have landscaping along the eastern side to cover that area which doesn't have very many features to it. Mancino: Don. Mehl: I think a lot can be ... northern side. Can't have a sign on the west side. But if we have the south properly done and placed ... going to take care of the whole ... I had concerns earlier about the placement of the meters and... I know you can't avoid them but you can hide them. I think by putting them on that northeast corner like you're talking about, it's going to hide it. I have seen some good looking buildings that ... bad side. You know they've all got either one side ... If the red, that looks great. By the way, I think the entire plan really looks great. Great set of drawings. The ... looks great. It's going to be a nice looking building. Doesn't the Tires Plus building have red on it? Is that red ... red brick? Is that a red roof? Generous: It's a red brick and they have red trim. ,7 1 1 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: Is it compatible? Mehl: Yeah. How close would that be? Generous: It's a little bit darker. More blood red. Mehl: Will there be any kind of flashing or are they going to compliment each other? Generous: I believe that they should be compatible. It's not, they won't clash and one will be a little bit darker than the other. You also have some depth. It will be nice with the, our interior landscaping will get some green in there too and that will help break it up once the trees grow. Mehl: Okay. I just wanted to bring that up. I vaguely remember the Tires Plus having a lot of red on it. I want to make sure that it wouldn't be something clashing. We mentioned the, I don't know several meetings ago about pedestrian friendly parking lots. And I kind of take a look at the parking lot layout here and I don't know ... makes it any more pedestrian friendly than any other parking lot. It looks like people either have to walk in and around the cars or walk on the street. They can't really walk across the little end dividers on each side with shrubberies and trees. I don't know what we can do about it. If it needs to be done but we did bring that up... Generous: There is that, the most easterly islands do have a sidewalk on them. Mehl: Where is that Bob? Mancino: On the eastern edge here ... I think some of that has to do with, as we were talking about just the size of the parking lot and how many spaces are needed. Mehl: Okay. Regarding the 65% and the 70% issue. I feel that needs to be taken a look at somehow to ... get to that 65 or closer to that. I agree with Ladd. I think there's not a lot of difference between 65 and 70 ... It's been a number that's been established, I think we have to work to get close to that. I have nothing further. Mancino: Okay, thank you. I think that the rendering looks great. I like the welcoming, kind of the energy level of those two sides and I'd like to see some of those architectural enhancements on that east side to landscaping or I mean you certainly don't want to do, I -don't-think -you �wanrto, are - those °things? "The awnings, "but something that, this is just so wonderful and people will be driving right in on that east side. If there's some way to enhance it and you can work with staff on that. To enhance that east side. My other 39 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 comment about the sign variance is, also I think that the monument sign will give you a presence as you're on Market or coming down 79th from either side so I don't see the reason for the wall sign on the west side of the building. I would like to see some sort of, in this plaza area, standard for lighting. I've noticed that on the western edge of the city where we have some fast food restaurants, there's lighting. Different kinds of lighting. Different heights. Different colors so I would like to see this compatible with Americana Bank. The height and the color of the lights. And I know that there was something about 20 bronze poles with shielded shoebox lighting. I think that's fine but again please make it compatible with that whole area. I would like to see staff come back and tell us that the entire, I call it a plaza, can come in at 65 %. I don't want to put the onus on anyone but I want to make sure that the entire area can come in at 65% and therefore maybe grant a 70% variance. I've just got to know that it's going to work. Generous: Okay. Well deny the variance and we'll push the rest of the subdivision. Mancino: Okay. Conrad: Deny the variance. Mancino: And push the rest of the. Generous: Because as part of the subdivision we said overall we'd meet the 65 %. Mancino: Okay. Gary Fischer: Excuse me. Mancino: Wait until I'm done. Just one second and then I'll let you come up. Bob I can also see in some of the plantings on the south side of the building where you've asked for enhanced landscaping to do something because it's so visible from TH 5, etc. Something with flowering or perennials or add some creative landscaping to it. If that would work with the applicant. Now this will be landscaped by a certified or registered landscape architect, correct? Generous: Yes. Mancino: Okay. Those are my only comments. Please. 40 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 r Gary Fischer: With regards to the coverage permit. Is it possible that the variance, that you ' could almost remove the variance request from our application as it strictly affects our lot and make it more applicable to the whole subdivision? ' Generous: Well that's in essence what would happen. If they deny the variance, we're going to have to make up that 2,700 square feet. ' Gary Fischer: Okay. So it really wouldn't matter whether it's denied or it's just. Generous: Well it does affect the next property. Ga ry Fischer: Yes. i Mancino: Thank you. May I have a motion. ' Conrad: Sure. I make a motion the Planning Commission recommends denial of the sign variance request to permit wall signage on two building elevations based on the findings contained in the staff report. Is that separate? Mancino: I was going to say, do we need to vote on that separately? Generous: Well I set it up separately. Mancino: Okay. May I have a second to that motion? Meyer: I'll second that. Mancino: Any discussion? Com - ad moved, Meyer seconded that the Planning Commission recommends denial of the sign variance request to permit wall signage on two building elevations based on the findings contained in the staff report All voted in favor and the motion caiiied unanimously. ' Mancino: There will be no variance for the sign on the second building frontage. Conrad: Madam Chair, I'll make a motion the Planning Commission recommends approval of ' Site Plan 495 -20 for a 5,500 square foot restaurant building on Lot 4, Block 1, Crossroads -Plaza =3rd Addition - lsased on - the 'site plan 'dated'T2 =4=95 and revised ` r2 :1'3 -95. - Eliminating the next sentence. The balance of that sentence in the staff report with the 15 conditions as of the staff report dated January 17th. 41 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Mancino: May I add a friendly amendment that there be a subdivision standard for lighting established for not only the height of the pole lighting but also the color of the lights. Conrad: Say that again. You said for the subdivision and I didn't understand that. Mancino: Well this whole subdivision. Generous: It should be compatible. Mancino: Yeah. See they got it. Conrad: I'm ... sort of the lowest common denominator here. Remember that. Mancino: And 17, that we add, that the applicant and staff work with adding landscape and maybe some architectural features to the east side of the building. Conrad: I agree with those because they're so specific. Mancino: I want 20 trees. Second to the motion. Meyer: I'll second that. Mancino: Any discussion? Conrad: Yeah just a little bit. As I tried to rationalize this, one way or another. We're short 3,000 feet and basically we're going to have to find that 3,000 feet and you'd probably pick up on something close, or 2,000. You know everybody's going to feel we tried and we're close and philosophically we can hang in there. But intellectually speaking, if you had to buy that 3,000 square feet, you'd be paying x dollars per foot, right? Mancino: Yes. Conrad: Now intellectually couldn't you say okay. So there's a cost there. Now maybe there's something else that we can get versus that cost that the developer, the building. Aanenson: Sure. Replacement of trees somewhere else. _-onnad: Yeah. And that's what-.. Meyer: Sort of a trade -off? Wj i a �J G � Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Conrad: Yeah. That's. Mancino: Boy you're going to make this complex for everybody you do business with. I mean now we're going to get into. Conrad: This is just a discussion because I haven't been able to figure this one out. I really stumbled on this and I think we're just forcing the, we're limiting the city's potential to sell the balance of the project, which makes me a little bit uncomfortable. I'm not really wild about that or whatever. We may not get the value out of it but we should. And what we're doing is we're letting the current project get away without imposing any kind of cost on this one in terms of maybe additional landscaping. In other words, if there's a $5,000.00 or $10,000.00 landscaping premium here, then maybe we could justify something happening on the balance of the subdivision that doesn't add up to that 3,000 feet that we're trying to get. Okay, that's just my little thinking that would make me feel comfortable but, and maybe this is going no place Madam Chairman but that would be the only reason we would not want to pass what we just made a motion to. That this project should pay a little bit towards a penalty for the impervious surface. Conrad: Yeah, that's right. That's right. That's where it would be. Aanenson: The developer being the city. Aanenson: It's part of the negotiations with Applebee's. They were concerned about, you know the easy way to solve it is to do joint parking and that's where we tried to put the additional sidewalk in. That took out some landscaping. They wanted to insure a certain amount in their purchase agreement. Amount of parking within their jurisdiction or control. So this is all part of the negotiation process. I think what you're saying might, well Bob did. There's another way to accomplish getting that back and certainly we looked at some of those opportunities but we, the city being the developer. But I think in the next piece it's not that... Mancino: Before we get to vote, we're still in discussion. I noticed that on the conditions there's nothing about the conditions that they have to have an agreement between the development to the west for parking spaces. Should that also be in the conditions? Or I didn't see it. Generous: That's part of the subdivision conditions. -Mancino: That`s art°of the,-wlTere? 43 11 Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 Generous: The subdivision was approved and it said they have to have cross access and parking agreements between the parcels. Mancino: So that fulfills that. Thank you. Generous: So that's contained in a separate document as a part of their purchase agreement. Mancino: Okay. Thank you. Comad moved, Meyer seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan 05 -20 for a 5,500 square foot ilestamant building on Lot 4, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition, based on the site plan dated 12 -4 -95 and revised 12- 13 -95, subject to the following conditions: 1. Install aeration tubes in the 8 1/2 foot center islands. 2. Replace the pin oaks with red oaks on the proposed landscaping plan. 3. Provide ornamental plantings in the sodded area in front of the north side of the building. 4. Incorporate trees in the landscaping on the south side of the building. 5. Install three trees adjacent to the western property line west of the parking lot. These trees shall be selected from the approved tree list and must be overstory trees suitable for parking lots. 6. Install "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and paint the curbing yellow. Contact the Fire Marshal for the exact location. 7. Full park and trail fees shall be paid per city ordinance. 8. The applicant shall enter into a site development agreement for the property and provide the necessary security to meet the conditions of approval. 9. The applicant shall incorporate a pitched roof element over the cooler units on the east side of the building. 10. Eliminate one of the parking spaces in the southwest corner of the site, eliminate the paving squares under the two Applebee's benches adjacent to the entrance to the E lul, Planning Commission Meeting - February 7, 1996 building, and eliminate the sidewalk area north of the building to expand the landscaping area. 11. The applicant shall apply for a separate sign permit for all signage on the site. Signage shall comply with city code requirements. 12. The joint parking facilities shall be protected by a recorded instrument acceptable to the city. 13. Staff recommends that the radiuses on the parking lot islands adjacent to the main drive aisles be increased from 10 feet to 20 feet. 14. The applicant and /or contractor shall be responsible for adjusting any existing storm sewer manholes and cleaning the city storm sewer system as needed in conjunction with this site development. 15. Rock construction entrances should be included with the site plan drawings. All catch basins shall be protected with silt fence and /or hay bales until the parking lot is paved. 16. That a subdivision standaW be established for the height and color of the pole lighting. 17. Additional landscaping and architectural features be added to enhance the east side of the building. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mancino: And when does this go in front of the City Council? Generous: February 26th. CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE CONCERNING BLUFF PROTECTION AND SIDE SLOPE SETBACKS. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions for staff? For Bob. Comments. Don. >Mehl: , — reallyAon't, -have :any. J -go along -wi y and- support I Mancino: Bob. 45 1